It's a bid that would be unusual, to say the least, but an analyst from Jeffries & Co, Peter Misek, has come to the conclusion that HP should at least license out webOS to Facebook, if not sell the OS outright. With the company's recent push into creating the "Facebook Phone" using Android, gaining heavy integration with Skype for VoIP and video calling access with friends, and reinventing their Messaging to bring all of your conversations with all of your connections to one place (similar to how webOS Synergy brings your IM chats and SMS together), Misek says that Facebook might stand the most to gain from an OS purchase, with webOS being at the top of that list.

The reasons why Facebook should consider this, if any company would, is all centered around the cloud capabilities and integration with webOS devices. Facebook could use a modified webOS Synergy to make getting onto the social giant's network so much easier (and nicer) than even the HTC Status currently allows, and webOS still has a lot of room for growth. Google+ will soon be perfectly integrated with every single Android device out there on the market. Meanwhile, what does Facebook have to continue their growth in that area?

In some ways, webOS has never really defined itself; Is it a gaming platform? The best OS for business users? A Social Networking mega-OS? The most developer-friendly ecosystem? It has a good grasp of all of these concepts, but none of them have really struck as the main selling point of webOS, and that has been a problem since early 2009 (you can't sell the concept of "multitasking", as we've seen). Facebook, on the other hand, could possibly give it a single purpose that could be easily sold to the masses.

When talking about hardware, Facebook already has built a relationship with HTC and INQ Mobile, so there would be no problem actually getting the devices made if it came to that point. And in fact, HTC might be more interested in working with webOS on their devices after Google's recent purchase of Motorola Mobility. Plus, Misek believes that carriers want a third smartphone ecosystem to raise the bar of competition and sales (he apparently doesn't think that Windows Phone or RIMM have what it would take to be that third major OS).

With all of the pieces already firmly in place, it looks like Facebook could stand to gain a lot from using webOS to become more integrated with the every-day lives of their users as it happens, and not just the re-telling of stories later on when they sit down at a computer.

We aren't sure what we think of this idea yet, with all of the concerns lately about Facebook privacy and their constant battles with other companies it would be a tricky situation for many of our users who have vowed to never use Facebook again. But if there was one company that could stand to grow from pushing further into the mboile market, it is Facebook. Since that is also one of the only companies that could promote webOS to more than 750 Million users worldwide instantly, it might not be a bad option for HP to look into, either.

HP might not want to sell webOS to Facebook as Misek believes they should, but licensing? Now that could work. Normally we like to scoff at analysts with their conflicting reports about the mobile market, but somehow we hope that something happens with this concept. Because, you know, something definitely needs to happen, and soon.

Then tomorrow, another analyst, or Facebook itself will come out and deny this is a remote possibility.

Then, another article, on say.....Sony? Or, to keep in the spirt of this article, Mozilla (another company that does software only - at least then the editors can claim that WebOS and B2G have something in common, even though there isn't a chance in **** )?

Actually Mozilla isn't that far-fetched as it might seem to you. After all the http://mozphone.com/ site exists, although it is quiet, and judging from the screens they use in their examples WebOS would be a major step up on the software side.

Mozilla might just be the next company that should be looking into buying WebOS.

...see, Producer? It would be now "a major step forward" for them, and it "makes sense" :)

This site is getting funnier every day. Although it is quite politically incorrect to laugh at the funeral, but if you have two functioning braincels, what else can you do after reading these "potential buyer rumors", and some "it makes a perfect sense" commenters??

I actually like the physical keyboard, as it allow me to be an active writer on the phone without getting a massive amount of fingerprints on the screen. I am in no doubt the physical keyboard will also afford me to type faster(when I get used to the AZERTY setup)

...I've answered SO many times that complaint about vertical slider...

The ONLY disadvantage that vertical slider has versus otherwise equally specified/built slab phone, would be increased thickness. Which, in case of "pebble" design of Pre phones, is hardly perceptible, in real life. I do have my Galaxy S2, a razor-thin slab, that feels awfull to hold, feels awfull to keep in your posket. I also do have HTC Desire S, which despited being just that little bit smaller and thicker, feels beautifull to hold in your hand & pocket. Rounded design does the trick.

Other than added thickness, it is only ADVANTAGES, all the way down. Better typing experience, added functionality, touch-typing, call assignement to press-and-hold.

Of course, I do agree that Slabs are selling great currently, but for all the different reasons, that you think, and for all the different reasons, that HPalm's failed. For a starter, Apple doesn't make an iOS slider. Secondly, there are NO high-end Android sliders out there. So, when you want a high-end phone, there aren't exactly too many options for you to buy one. Like in, you know, NONE options at all. So I do not know how you can drw your conclusions on slider FF, if there just aren't any really high-end sliders out there, that could coompete with slabs. I'd buy high end Android portrait slider in an instant, if I only could.

It wasn't slider FF that has failed, it wasn't webOS that has failed.

It is just like saying that Ferrari does not sell million cars a year, because they are only selling red ones, => ergo "people do not like red cars, and that is why Ferrari failed to mass-sell them". You are just mistaking causes and effects here.

I also think that for the sake of market recognition that slabs are getting, HPalm should've started with high-end slab in the first half of this year, followed by Pre 3 as a mainstream business device, followed by TouchPad, priced appropriately to it's mediocre specification, and then eventually, followed by funny little Veer, at the very last, if they do not have anything more important to do. And all these should've been as "hard" a launches as humanly possible, instead of a pathetic "soft" ones.

It was crappy hardware quality, Pre-mature releases and wrong order of hardware release, and woefully inadequate marketing. And too little, too late, feeble attempts from HP.

It was not OS failing, which is unequivocally acclaimed as a "great/best mobile OS out there, let down by poor quality and specification hardware, and lack of apps", by anyone who has a clue about that space. It was NOT the vertical slider form factor failing, only it's crappy & falling apart implementation.

I totally agree. I would've jumped ship to the iPhone long before the Pre ever existed if it had a keyboard. I have a Pre2 and a Photon (Primarily because a webOS Slingplayer app never materialized) and even with Swype, I still have a much easier time with the physical keyboard. I do like being able to 'say' text messages and have been pretty impressed with the voice transcription on the Photon and would love to see that come to webOS someday. Maybe I don't have the finger dexterity that the millions of people who love these slabs have, but I am a surgeon, so I'm guessing my dexterity isn't too far below average. I will never understand why the Pre3 wasn't released before the TP & Veer. If I ever run into Todd Bradley, Jon Rubenstein, or Stephen DeWitt in the street I will make damn sure to find out.

I love all these trolling android fans on Precentral now, saying how ridiculous it is to consider that Facebook, or Qualcomm, or HTC would buy or license WebOS and blaming the Precentral writers - who are reporting on stories from elsewhere on the web. As if these posters know more than the analysts at these investment houses . . . or more than someone like Dion, who wrote about how Facebook would be a great fit for WebOS and knows more about the industry than anyone posting on this board, by far . . .
Everyone forgets that WebOS was sold once before - after being called a complete failure, and no one even thought HP was a possible purchaser - and at the time it was a dream come true. Until the CEO got fired and a new HP board chairman from Oracle and a new CEO from SAP got hired, and wanted to get rid of all consumer hardware.
HP clearly has no idea what they want to do right now. They are a rudderless ship. Leo has been ordered to quit giving any media interviews by the board - he has been pulled from all media events, and he is hanging by a thread right now as large HP investors are furious with him. Ray Lane is now doing nothing but traveling around the world trying to make these people happy and giving media interviews trying to get positive coverage for HP.
We know that last time, Apple, HTC, Google, HP, and Lenovo all talked to Palm about purchasing WebOS . . . and maybe more. There are lots of very smart engineers and users out there that recognize that WebOS is great. Heck, no less than Anand Lal Shimpi said that without the bugs in his tested 3.0 and lag, then the Touchpad would be his favorite tablet - bar none. This on a first generation product rushed to the marketplace. Very smart people recognize that WebOS is great, perhaps the best mobile OS in the world today - can't see that it will be allowed to die. Someone will want it I suspect - at least a licensee. I don't care if it is kyocera - just give me a phone.
If Facebook buys it/licenses it, watch out. They have great engineers and could change the game.

- ever fix the lag
- ever fix the bugs
- put it on great hardware
- release it from a company with enough money
- release it from a company with enough vision
- ....or both
- get developers onboard
- get an ecosystem
- train carrier reps to understand and love it

etc., etc., etc......if these stars can magically align, it would be the bestest OS ever.

But there's always an excuse as to why that never comes to pass.

It's the never the fault of WebOS itself. It's the bad companies, mean carriers, brainwashed Apple or Android fans....basically, everybody always beats up WebOS and takes its lunch money. No fair.

Because I can honestly tell, I don't. I use Android daily (have two phones and a rooted Nook Color), I've passed on iOS after extensive testing (well it didn't had to be too extensive, in honest, this OS is a nice&shiny little thing for retards, that is probably why it sells so well, there's so many of them out there), and the only advantage IMHO it has over webOS, is the high quality and availability of the applications, and the high quality and variety of hardware.

Which I tend to agree, that all in all, more than pays up for a crippled OS experience, BUT: in terms of OS (I repeat: OS) experience, there's no contest. Android is sooooo retarded in comparison, it just screams "I was designed by nerds, for nerds", everywhere.

So, I do not really understand nor agree with your constant moaning over webOS ITSELF, as such a bad thing. Nor, in fact, does any technical writer I've had a chance to read, not only here, but anywhere in the blogosphere, you must be pretty lonely voice stating that webOS itself is such a crappy and bad piece of work.

Actually, these so-called "excuses" that you have listed, are the exact ones that are brought to the table by these wery same technical writers/testers/bloggers, as "explanations", why they cannot recommend particular webOS product, or would recommend to wait until some/most of them were resolved, before making a jump to webOS.

SO, maybe, just maybe, these "excuses" as you call them, are actually a genuine and valid REASONS for a webOS failure. Because surely, there has to be some reasons, right?

But that's just it....if two companies, several handsets and a tablet, countless hundreds of millions/billions of dollars spent, and multiple global ad campaigns can't make this a viable product that can be sold profitably and interest developers.....what can?

You say that the "only" advantages iOS and Android have are the quality/quantity of applications and the high quality and variety of hardware. Uh, those are pretty much the only things most consumers care about.

The WebOS "experience" is one of one step forward, and two steps back.

I love having a Web-based OS that syncs/synergizes well with Facebook, Twitter, etc. - one step forward
...but it is frustrating having a buggy browser with only a handful of the alternatives that leading platforms have, and Flash implementation that is half-done and will likely never be updated - two steps back.

This OS is largely where it began in 2009, which is inexcusable given the progress competitors have during this time.

You can most certainly cite dunderheaded moves by both Palm and HP that hobbled WebOS' chances at success, but you could say the same for any competitor. Apple priced the iPhone too high and kept it on an exclusive carrier for way too long. Google still can't deliver timely handset updates across handsets and carriers, and launched Honeycomb with no app support and even less advertising. But the quality and momentum of those platforms were too massive to allow this to cripple them. If WebOS couldn't overcome its respective challenges, then maybe it wasn't as great as it seemed to be and deserves to be retired. It was given every possible chance, and it blew all of them.

In general, I do agree with you, with the exceptions:
" Apple priced the iPhone too high and kept it on an exclusive carrier for way too long."
..they were redefining the market with the iPhone, and after succeeding in this, they were a monopoly, so they could price it as high as they wanted, and do whatever they liked with it - they still owned the market.

"Google still can't deliver timely handset updates across handsets and carriers"
...yeah but by and large, anyone who cares (tinkering types of users", can do it themselves, by rooting/custom roms & distributions

"and launched Honeycomb with no app support and even less advertising."
...because it is a temporary patch for a tablet space, a patch that will be integrated back with the mainstream Android release with Ice Cream Sandwich, when phone/tablet forks will be merged.

"But the quality and momentum of those platforms were too massive to allow this to cripple them. If WebOS couldn't overcome its respective challenges, then maybe it wasn't as great as it seemed to be and deserves to be retired. It was given every possible chance, and it blew all of them."
I do not agree. "Quality" and "Android" doesn't go in one sentence (unless we are talking about hardware quality, or applications quality, but it has nothing to do with Android, and all to do with OEMs and developer adoption). HP didn't give it ANY chances, since taking over Palm, they were killing it successively with every marketing flop, with every bad decision taken and publicized.

It took "Droid does" campaign (oh, wait, wasn't it damned "slider" form factor, and horizontal one, to boot - doesn't seem to weaken it at the time, does it), to put Android on the map. Wher is your webOS equivalent campaign?? Manny Pacayo (who the **** is he, was my first thought), funny english guy, and this whatshername teenage starlet? And how many of them have you seen - I was for two weeks in US in the end of July, I have seen ONE TouchPad TV advert in that time. I cannot count how many iPAd/iPhone adverts I have seen during that time. I haven't seen ANY SINGLE ONE TouchPAd's TV advert in Ireland, nor in UK, where I live.

Call it murder, sabotage, whatever. The thing failed. Does that mean that everything about it was bad? Nope. But it failed and no matter how much to try to analyze/rationalize it...it simply didn't fly...it failed.

If "failed" is too harsh of a way of putting it, let's just agree that it had "slower than expected consumer adoption" and leave it at that.

100% agree. Precentral.net should be renamed Caveatcentral.net because every hopeful assertion about webOS comes with a caveat - usually one that is never going to happen. HP will do great in the smartphone market if they can produce a super phone that is much better than the iPhone. [snicker]

Let's see... RIM only shipped 200,000 Playbooks last quarter, down from 500,000 the quarter before. They have $754 million more in inventory on its hands than at the beginning of its fiscal year six months earlier. That does not include units that are piling up at retailers.

Sharp just announced that they are discontinuing two of their three tablet lines.

...in the meantime, Asus is ramping up production of their Transformer Honeycomb tablet, being priced very reasonably, having a physical keyboard dock, and having a good build quality and long & high quality spec and component sheet.

So, is this the time to get into realistically-priced tablet game? Game that has been so dramatically missed by HP?

Next in line, is a Fusion Garage's android-kernel based, extremely creatively designed UI, "Grid" tablet, being reduced in price by $200, before even getting released, versus earlier rumors. Something that HP had failed to do with TP, to such a dramatic results.

So, is this the time to get into realistically-priced tablet game, again?

I don't think posters are suddenly android trolls. It's just that people are so burned out from the webOS drama.
I don't think many smartphone companies have the courage to buy an os now esp since they're already windows or android. Windows is already the backup in case google gives all the advantages to motorola.
The only licensee or purchaser that made sense to me was Amazon. They don't care about thousands of apps, they only want amazon stuff and there are already amazon compatible webOS apps and amazon doesn't need advertisement. Amazon fans don't care what runs their new kindle device. Too bad all rumors point to a android device.
So barring that, the only other options I see is HP reverses course and kicks CEO out and keeps webOS or gives webOS to PSG.
Facebook has tons of money and probably does want to block googles' moves with android phones but buying an OS is very expensive. Licensing is possible but how many licensees are needed before webOS can support its operations with those licensing fees? Those fees are limited by the disrupting fact that Android is very low cost/free (if you don't get sued that is)

"As if these posters know more than the analysts at these investment houses . . . or more than someone like Dion, who wrote about how Facebook would be a great fit for WebOS and knows more about the industry than anyone posting on this board, by far"

guess what, I've been bashed for criticizing HP in their retarded "strategy" and spactic "execution" all year round, with so many posters here playing the very same card as you do: "geez, you'd think that HP, the biggest PC manufacturer company in the whole world, would know better than some armchair analysts, sheeesh"

Turns out, they haven't. Turns out, that logic and reasoning is still somehow more accurate than being "biggest". Biggest companies have folded in the past, and they will in the future.

And "analyst in the investments houses"... huh, huh. Don't even start, before you live long enough to learn that they are just people like you and me, and if they are talking nonsense, well, they are talking nonsense. And it happens surprisingly often.

You'd be better off trusting logic, common sense and your own judgement. Or not, it depends. I certainly am.

Sorry guys, but half you sound like your at the track betting on the horse with the broke leg... WebOS is good at a few things, but the fact that its good at a few things is the biggest hindrance from being great. Look... If I can't even rename a tab in my app launcher somethings gotta give.... The OS is so restrictive with the users ability to modify... I wish you the best WebOS... But seriously you have been sold once and fired once... Its maybe time to realize its time to retire.

This will never happen - Facebook are in bed with Microsoft, even more so after Google started to compete ferociously with G+.

The actual Facebook phone (if there ever is one) would most probably be running on Win Phone OS - those Android phones were just co-branded HTC handsets with token integration.

Facebook would really need to convince themselves that they really needed to own and control their own OS before they would consider webOS - and even then why should they (unless HP give it away)? MS will be most accomodating I expect, and if not they can just branch stock Android like Amazon are doing. They certainly won't pay for it.

At least I have two webOS devices which do their job quite nicely - without facebook. Maybe there will be no new devices, maybe not. As I said, if such _new_ devices will brought to us by facepalm, I'm not going to buy them.

Yahoo is the one loosing market share to Google, so maybe Yahoo, not Facebook, should try to buy or license webOS. Google has Android to drive its mobile connectivity and Yahoo could do the same with webOS. If Yahoo gave away webOS to manufactures the way Google gives away Android (minus the Microsoft royalties), they could capitalize in the webOS synergy to give their mail, calendar and search engine a home in the mobile market and invite Facebook and Twitter along for the ride.

Wow, The man is just reporting on a story about webos. That's what they do here, report on stories about all things webos and editorialize. I apprecite coming here to see what the buzz is. If you don't want to read an article, don't read it.

Because I can honestly tell, I don't. I use Android daily (have two phones and a rooted Nook Color), I've passed on iOS after extensive testing (well it didn't had to be too extensive, in honest, this OS is a nice&shiny little thing for retards, that is probably why it sells so well, there's so many of them out there), and the only advantage IMHO it has over webOS, is the high quality and availability of the applications, and the high quality and variety of hardware.

Which I tend to agree, that all in all, more than pays up for a crippled OS experience, BUT: in terms of OS (I repeat: OS) experience, there's no contest. Android is sooooo retarded in comparison, it just screams "I was designed by nerds, for nerds", everywhere.

So, I do not really understand nor agree with your constant moaning over webOS ITSELF, as such a bad thing. Nor, in fact, does any technical writer I've had a chance to read, not only here, but anywhere in the blogosphere, you must be pretty lonely voice stating that webOS itself is such a crappy and bad piece of work.

Actually, these so-called "excuses" that you have listed, are the exact ones that are brought to the table by these wery same technical writers/testers/bloggers, as "explanations", why they cannot recommend particular webOS product, or would recommend to wait until some/most of them were resolved, before making a jump to webOS.

SO, maybe, just maybe, these "excuses" as you call them, are actually a genuine and valid REASONS for a webOS failure. Because surely, there has to be some reasons, right?

...well, I don't have issues recommending it to anyone, IF that happened, IF they pulled something good quality out of it, IF they fixed issues with developer relationships, IF they managed to get high quality hardware vendor onboard, IF they managed to sell the message that they indeed have a vision behind it - like, I don't give a phukk if the next webOS phone, manufactured by HTC, was to boast Kellogs Crispies logo on it, if the above things were fixed.

For the past few weeks, we have been hearing about he potential purchasers for webOS such as Samsung, HTC, Qualcomm, and now, Facebook. I believe many people includes me are starting to feel tiring about hearing these kind of news every once in awhile. However, when Facebook's name was brought up today, it does make me feel more interested. As the article has mentioned, Google+ has been a huge success and it might be the most eligible challenger to the social network giant, so what kind of strategy does Facebook have in mind when Google is clearly stepping into Facebook's kingdom, and might have a huge chance to overthrow its crown?

I'm wondering why it is that if an industry giant is faced with competition, said giant automatically needs webOS to come to their rescue.

HP needs to be more like Apple...better get webOS.
Samsung needs a edge due to Googorola...better get webOS.
HTC...see Samsung...better get webOS.
Qualcom needs a leg up on other chip makers...better get webOS.
Facebook is being challenged by Google+...better get webOS.